Investors.com...
Education
Vs. Bureaucracy
Posted 10/31/2011
Waste:
How can a 375% education
spending increase over four decades result in flat-lined reading, math
and
science scores? Because all that largesse feeds a bureaucratic monster
sheltered from competition.
According
to Neal McCluskey, the
associate director of the Cato Institute’s Center for Educational
Freedom, the
education spending much of the American public believes to be a vital
investment in the country’s future, actually “gives money to a
catatonic heap
of warm bodies and says, ‘Stay the way you are.’”
In
touting his jobs bill, President
Obama calls on audiences to “tell Congress to pass this bill and put
teachers
back in the classroom where they belong.”
But
speaking to a Cato policy
conference in New York City last Friday, McCluskey made no bones about
federal
education spending being bad for kids and bad for the economy — a big
reason
being that much of the spending goes not to real teachers or principals
but to
those holding an array of bureaucratic “support” positions.
McCluskey,
author of “Feds in the
Classroom: How Big Government Corrupts, Cripples, and Compromises
American
Education,” praised the Senate for last month defeating the $35 billion
education employee portion of Obama’s so-called American Jobs Act
(while
warning that a $30 billion school infrastructure measure might still
pass).
“How
can it be good for students
throughout the country to lose teachers, principals, secretaries,”
McCluskey
asked, not to mention “periodic assessment associates (a real New York
City
job), labor support unit consultants, talent research and evaluation
managers,
and, employees for the Law and Order Administrative Trials Unit?”
Because
those “jobs” are what the real
federal spending per pupil of 375% since 1970 has largely gone toward —
the
invention and support of mysterious bureaucratic positions like
“instructional
aide” (of which there has been an almost 12-fold increase per-pupil)
rather
than to honest-to-goodness teaching.
Public
school employment has increased
at 10 times the rate of enrollment, with a massive expansion in
administrative
staff. All this dwarfs the much-bemoaned “cuts” achieved from time to
time over
the years.
Beyond
ever-expanding, militantly
union-supported bureaucracy, McCluskey is quick to stress that “the
main
problem of public schools is not bureaucracy but lack of competition.”
Contrarian
education scholars like
McCluskey have insisted for decades that vouchers and other forms of
school
choice made available to low- and middle-income parents would not only
give
pupils a way out of the disastrous shortcomings of so many public
school
systems in the nation, especially in the poorer urban areas, but would
force
the public schools themselves to improve.
Overall,
per-pupil spending has risen
from $5,671 in 1970, according to McCluskey, to $12,922 in 2007-08 — a
128%
rise — and public school employment has been 10 times the rate of
student
enrollment. Meanwhile, school district administrative staff per pupil
has
doubled.
What
has all that presumably
well-intentioned government education spending and “hiring of teachers”
bought
the American taxpayer? Stagnant reading, math and science scores for
17-year-olds over the last 40 years, as irrefutably shown in statistics
from
the National Assessment of Educational Progress, which McCluskey
concedes is “a
very incomplete measure, but is also Washington’s own measuring stick.”
Funneling
more federal money to local
institutions only feeds the monster. “Rather than allowing economic
conditions
to force a little trimming of the suffocating bureaucracies,” McCluskey
warns,
“it wraps them in insulation and tells them, ‘no need to change here!’ “
So
this latest “economic stimulus/jobs
bill” from a president supposedly dedicated to “change” and “hope”
would only
protect and worsen a hopeless public education status quo.
Read
this and other articles at
investors.com
|